rec.autos.simulators

by **Gerh31** » Thu, 14 Jun 2001 11:46:57

Has anyone compared a TNT2 ultra which I believe is ddr memory to a Geforce 2
MX (which is sdram) on Nascar 4? or any game for that matter...I need to get
my nephew a video crad and want to get him something that cost me as little as
possible, but still will not be game/enjoyment limiting. How's the
comparison?

C.G. (remove none)

1.2 Anthlon C
MSI K7T 6380 (w/o Raid)
Bios 1.1 "High Perf"
256 DDR crucual
Creative Geforce2 GTS 32meg
WD 40gig ATA 100
Plextor 16x
win2k sp2
3DMark2000 score: 7000
3DMark2001 score: 3226
Sandra memory score: 572/766

by **Kirk Hous** » Thu, 14 Jun 2001 12:11:55

If you have a slow processor the Hardware T&L on the MX will help a lot. I
think the MX has more fill rate too but not sure. Unless the TNT2 Ultra is
a lot cheaper go with the MX.

by **Alex Camero** » Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:03

A GF2 MX will stamp on a TNT2 ultra in every department go for the MX there
are MX's with DDR like the creative one but they actually perform less well
than the SDR MX's because it is 64bit DDR compared to the 128bit SDR that is
used.

Alex

by **Fil** » Fri, 15 Jun 2001 04:23:17

Hi,

>Has anyone compared a TNT2 ultra which I believe is ddr memory to a Geforce 2
>MX (which is sdram) on Nascar 4?

TnTx is SDRAM only. I've switched from TnT2U to GF2MX (sdr) and it's
faster in every game, so I guess that in N4 also.
But wach out for new series of MX cards (GF2MX 200). They are slower
than standard GF2MX, and maybe even slower than TnT2U ...

bye
Fil
--
"forward forever - backward never"

http://graminger.cjb.net | ICQ# 15777307

by **Gerh31** » Fri, 15 Jun 2001 23:38:14

Do you know what exactly they reduced down on the gf2 mx 200 that makes it
slower than other Gf2 MXs?

C.G. (remove none)

1.2 Anthlon C
MSI K7T 6380 (w/o Raid)
Bios 1.1 "High Perf"
256 DDR crucual
Creative Geforce2 GTS 32meg
WD 40gig ATA 100
Plextor 16x
win2k sp2
3DMark2000 score: 7000
3DMark2001 score: 3226
Sandra memory score: 572/766

by **Mike Armstron** » Sat, 16 Jun 2001 00:34:02

>Hi,

>>Has anyone compared a TNT2 ultra which I believe is ddr memory to a Geforce 2
>>MX (which is sdram) on Nascar 4?

>TnTx is SDRAM only. I've switched from TnT2U to GF2MX (sdr) and it's
>faster in every game, so I guess that in N4 also.
>But wach out for new series of MX cards (GF2MX 200). They are slower
>than standard GF2MX, and maybe even slower than TnT2U ...

>bye
>Fil

Hey Fil,

You speak not a word of a lie.

I was bought a JetWay GF2MX (200 :( ) and it *IS* slower than the
Creative Labs TNT2U which I used previously (and am soon to use
again). It was about 35 + vat from Dabs. Avoid it like the plague!

My 3Dmark score with the GF2MX200 is circa 1080 (thats with a 1Ghz
Intel PIII), the score with the TNT2U is circa 1500!!

I spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out if my system was
misconfigured or if the GF2 was f**ked, but the system's fine and the
board *seems* to be OK too, just very slow.

Avoid the MX200.

by **Fil** » Sat, 16 Jun 2001 05:49:12

Hi,

>Do you know what exactly they reduced down on the gf2 mx 200 that makes it
>slower than other Gf2 MXs?

AFAIR MX200 has a reduced memory bus to 64bit, like in Riva TnT2 M64.
Standard GF2MX and G2MX 400 has a 128bit memory bus, which is faster.
That's the main difference I think ...

bye
Fil
--
"forward forever - backward never"

http://graminger.cjb.net | ICQ# 15777307

rec.autos.simulators

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?

Which is better TNT2 Ultra or GF2 MX for N4?